Is law on graft workable?<\/p>\n
Having been branded the third most corrupt country in the
\nworld, Indonesia has made a number of attempts during the post-
\nSoeharto era to abolish its shamefully tarnished image. While
\nthere have been numerous public discussions on corruption
\ninvolving experts in the field, there have been few results
\nbecause the authorities have resisted change.<\/p>\n
Former president Soeharto's then spokesman defended the New
\nOrder regime saying that \"we have shown our sincerity because we
\nhave established many supervisory bodies, right from the top of
\ngovernment down to the district level, what else do we need?\" On
\nthe other hand, the House of Representatives were being told by
\nofficials of the state audit body that their findings had not
\nreceived any response by the government ministries concerned. The
\nwhole case was nothing but a cruel joke on the part of the
\nauthorities.<\/p>\n
Recently the Megawati administration and the House refused to
\ncopy the success stories of Malaysia, Singapore or Hong Kong in
\ntheir drive to eradicate corruption -- as many experts had urged
\n-- but decided to fight graft in their own way. President
\nMegawati Soekarnoputri signed on Nov. 20 a new law against
\ncorruption that had earlier been passed by the House.<\/p>\n
The question now is will the new law be effective enough to
\nfight graft and help clean up the nation's reputation? Some have
\nsaid \"no\" but others \"yes\" because they have seen new positive
\nelements in the law, which is a revamp of the old law enacted in
\n1999.<\/p>\n
After investigating former cases of corruption, the new law
\nhas taken into account that bureaucrats involved in graft usually
\ncollaborate with cronies and relatives, so suspects or defendants
\nare prone to use any tricks up their sleeves to save each other.<\/p>\n
There are harsher punishments here that were not to be found
\nin any former laws. For example: Anyone found guilty of
\ncorruption can be jailed for a minimum of four years or a maximum
\nof life plus be fined between Rp 200 million (US$19,800) and Rp 1
\nbillion ($100,000).<\/p>\n
The new law also reverses the task of the prosecutor to prove
\nthat the defendant is guilty. Now the defendant has to prove
\ntheir innocence. This also denies the police, who have been
\ninvolved in an earlier stage of questioning, of their opportunity
\nto block the case and dismiss it for lack of sufficient evidence
\nto prosecute the suspect.<\/p>\n
But the questionable aspect of the law is why it frees a
\ngovernment official from prosecution if they have been involved
\nin a case of corruption involving Rp 10 million or less. Does the
\nlaw recognize the principle of justice for every citizen, or does
\nit believe that there will be too many corrupt people taken to
\ncourt so it does not make time for the small fry?<\/p>\n
To make the law more effective the law will also set up Komisi
\nPemeriksa (Interrogation Commission), yet it does not detail who
\nwould comprise the body. If the commission includes police or
\nprosecutors it will compromise the independence of the commission
\nand will render it useless.<\/p>\n
The last question is who is now in charge of supervising
\njudges in case a fellow colleague is tried for corruption?
\nIndonesia has had its fair share of recent bitter experiences
\nwith this problem. Let's hope the answer is a step in the right
\ndirection.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/is-law-on-graft-workable-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}